Author
Topic: Has it ever occurred to you that we are all wrong? (Read 8617 times)

Just a question. And placed in the Chatter section so no one is offended.

No prove or traces of god? Is that true? How did the people living in Egypt thousands of years ago move blocks of stone 2000 tons of weight? How did cavemen work out aerodynamics. Is it not possible that there are supreme beings? Not gods, sort of the stargate stuff. Why reject god if in fact he might be very real? Just a little different from what the church preaches. I do not believe in a god. But what if the guy who shows up has good arguments to make me do what he wants me to do? Politics and religion used to be the same sort of trash so the question is not about religion. Should we not look into our past and maybe discover that we are not almighty?

Politics and religion used to be the same sort of trash so the question is not about religion. Should we not look into our past and maybe discover that we are not almighty?

Who said we were almighty? I mean, I know I am, but who said you were?

Logged

The truth is absolute. Life forms are specks of specks (...) of specks of dust in the universe.Why settle for normal, when you can be so much more? Why settle for something, when you can have everything?We choose our own gods.

Right. No traces of god, didn't identify them either. But it is like my mother in law looking at a book. She can't read.

Antique construction still is worth discussing. No god, but sure advanced knowledge.

Aerodynamics, yes they did. All bugs are winged by the shoulders. Not the one that was found in the precolumbian sites. They amplified it and built it. The thing flies. No hearsay. My friend in Paris robbed the site himself and my father built the model.

I agree, no worshipping.

Evidence has to be identified as such. Patterns are meaningless if not recognized and understood, reference to my mother in law again. I admit that most of the things around me I do not understand. I might want to take my pills again.

Like OAA, I question my own knowledge. It is how I ended up where I am. I still now think, "well, what if I could be wrong about that" and when I do, I look it up, I try to find out what I can and educate myself.

I accept the possibility that a supreme being, whatever it may be, exists. However the evidence to suggest such a thing is so insignificant, I don't find it's worth believing. Just like I don't believe unicorns, leprechauns or SpongeBob. All of those things have equal believability in my eyes. I will accept there's a possibility for each of them, yes, even SpongeBob, but I may not necessarily see credit due to the lack of support. In the case of SpongeBob, remember we don't understand how the universe works 100%, I would have to accept the possibility that a world where the human imagination has a creative power (in that it is able to create real things), kind of like the South Park episode called 'Imagination Land' or maybe Stephen Hillenburg actually based his cartoon on a real sea sponge he encountered diving, we could be talking about a part of the ocean he's not been able to find and probably kept his mouth shut due to the mockery he would receive in telling people SpongeBob is real. There are in an infinite number of 'possibilities' due to lack of knowledge, but it doesn't mean I get to pick and choose what's 'true' to fill in those gaps.

What I find people who believe there's evidence for supreme beings, be it a deity or aliens or whatever, what they call evidence is generally untested and is dependent on how they choose to interpret what's there. Give your analogy about reading isn't giving me much reassurances about what you'd consider evidence. It's not about how you 'see' things. Evidence is about looking what's there, piecing it with other evidence, sure you may create a hypothesis, but it doesn't really stand until the evidence is highly conclusive.

I would say as it stands the 'supreme' remains as a hypothesis. Exactly what evidence is there? What people tend to do is use the 'god of the gaps' argument and in the case of other supreme beings (usually aliens) a 'supreme being of the gaps' argument, which is basically, "I don't understand this, so a supreme being must have done it". People can't accept that marvels of ancient society couldn't have been created by ancient civilisation, because they simply would have not been able. Who says they're not able? Who says they needed the assistance of a higher being? Humanity itself is capable of great and fantastic things, we can see this with modern marvels, I mean for Christ sakes, I'm creating this post with a device made of metal and plastic fed by electricity. No supreme beings invented the computer, the internet nor have they possessed the power to harness electricity to bring us devices powered by electricity. These much more modern marvels are well documented and we know how the discoveries were made.

So it always baffles me that when we have such amazing things we take for granted today that people in ancient society weren't also capable of doing amazing things.

« Last Edit: June 04, 2013, 04:32:19 PM by Seppuku »

Logged

“It is difficult to understand the universe if you only study one planet” - Miyamoto MusashiWarning: I occassionally forget to proofread my posts to spot typos or to spot poor editing.

Maybe this is covered elsewhere, but why is the default position that if something more powerful or "godlike" shows up then the thing to do is worship it? I deal with some real jerks everyday more powerful than I (within the realm of work), and it never crosses my mind to worship. Why so with gods or "supreme beings"?

If such a thing demanded your worship, then I guess that's on you to decide, but why is the assumption that one would "naturally" worship that thing?

Logged

If xian hell really exists, the stench of the burning billions of us should be a constant, putrid reminder to the handful of heavenward xians how loving your god is. - neopagan

The quoting gets a little complicated so I just answer and you will know what I refer to.

The construction link was informative. It still it puzzles me why people do these things whilst they could actually go look for food. Anyway, they did.

I am not underemployed. But I do find things boring and even though I run one of the largest vehicles on this planet, it is boring. And I have no TV.

I'll just sit it out and probably god doesn't show up.

Of course I am not at all educated in most matters, just the ones I know. But it frustrates me to see how Galaxies obviously work, I can know the chemical processes, study biology and look for answers. The fact that in the end I am running into a wall that I cannot pass angers me. Then again, in daily life I can still enjoy a BBQ.

Maybe this is covered elsewhere, but why is the default position that if something more powerful or "godlike" shows up then the thing to do is worship it? I deal with some real jerks everyday more powerful than I (within the realm of work), and it never crosses my mind to worship. Why so with gods or "supreme beings"?

If such a thing demanded your worship, then I guess that's on you to decide, but why is the assumption that one would "naturally" worship that thing?

I do not worship as I do not believe in God. And I have to deal wit A..holes often enough. Maybe it is the longing for somebody being responsible and caring for one, like parents? I made the experience that the people who work for me want me to take decisions for them, they are awaiting the word. After they can either complain or have a party. Might it be that?

This falls under the category of any sufficiently advanced being seeming "godlike" to less advanced beings. But it would have to be pretty damn advanced.

I freaked out the African children in the village I lived in by taking my retainer out of my mouth. They thought I could remove the roof of my mouth. Nowadays some of them probably have braces themselves, so that's out as a Halloween party trick.

Imagine what a person in the Middle Ages would think of things as common today as a dishwasher, brain surgery, tinted contact lenses, prosthetic limbs or a cell phone that plays Star Trek videos.[1]

Aerodynamics, yes they did. All bugs are winged by the shoulders. Not the one that was found in the precolumbian sites. They amplified it and built it. The thing flies. No hearsay. My friend in Paris robbed the site himself and my father built the model.

can you expand on this please

Logged

"...but on a lighter note, demons were driven from a pig today in Gloucester." Bill Bailey

Aerodynamics, yes they did. All bugs are winged by the shoulders. Not the one that was found in the precolumbian sites. They amplified it and built it. The thing flies. No hearsay. My friend in Paris robbed the site himself and my father built the model.

can you expand on this please

Yes I can. But you have probably read most of it already. They found this scarabae but it has the wings low. Bugs or maybe beetles is the better word do not exist with that characteristic. I told my father. He has a friend who was employed in Airbus Industries in Bremen/Germany. They build a scanned model at scale. It was actually better than recently built commercial airplanes.

The finder I met during a flight from Bogota to Madrid. I held the scarabae, which was made from gold, in my hands when I accepted his invitation to Paris and went there to see him. I was working in Marseilles at the time. He has other artifacts too.

I do think that we are not the first technologically advanced culture. No gods or aliens involved.

Maybe this is covered elsewhere, but why is the default position that if something more powerful or "godlike" shows up then the thing to do is worship it? I deal with some real jerks everyday more powerful than I (within the realm of work), and it never crosses my mind to worship. Why so with gods or "supreme beings"?

If such a thing demanded your worship, then I guess that's on you to decide, but why is the assumption that one would "naturally" worship that thing?

Because that's what we're used to from the Abrahamic monotheistic gods[1]. They demand worship and lay down the hurt if you don't. It's not like you have a choice in the matter. And this appears in other fictional tales too. Ancient Greek myths are filled with people neglecting the worship of the gods and suffering for it. And there are plenty of scifi tales where the aliens come here to subjegate us and yes, you had better worship them. "They can hurt me, so I'd better be nice to them"Remember when Kim Jong-Il died? The 'spontaneous' outpour of grief? Just in case the not-so-secret police would think they weren't suffuciently upset.Or those old clip of the Stalin's speeches ... where no one dared be the first to stop applauding.

In my experience, people who actually deserve worship never seem to actually want it.

The construction link was informative. It still it puzzles me why people do these things whilst they could actually go look for food. Anyway, they did.

Because Egypt happened to be a place that produced loads and loads of food. More than they needed, even. So, not all Egyptians needed to work at collecting food. These people could be employed as artisans, builders or professional soldiers.That's why the people in ancient Arabia never built anything so grand, they WERE too busy not starving.

Of course I am not at all educated in most matters, just the ones I know. But it frustrates me to see how Galaxies obviously work, I can know the chemical processes, study biology and look for answers. The fact that in the end I am running into a wall that I cannot pass angers me. Then again, in daily life I can still enjoy a BBQ.

It pisses me off too. I too like to know for the sake of knowing. But at some point, quantum theory, string theory, sorry, I just can't grasp it to a meaningful extent anymore. But it is comforting to know that there are people out there who do understand that stuff and who are working on figuring out new stuff. Sure, it would be neat if aliens sudden showed up, explained centuries worth of science to us, took a few snapshots of the Eifel tower and went home, leaving us unmolested. But we'll get there on our own eventually.

Logged

Science: I'll believe it when I see itFaith: I'll see it when I believe it

I met the french gentlemen about 15 years ago. The Airbus Engineer who actually built models with me and my brother is Mr. Klaus Rudolph. I then did not have the subject in mind until I saw a documentary in History.com.

They have independently built models of Egyptian and precolombian findings. Whilst I have no personal knowledge of the Egyptian ones I held a precolumbian in my hands.

Whilst there is always the risk of hoax I reacted differently since I knew of the matter from personal experience. I did not hold a Chinese toy in my hands whilst in criminal investigation even that might be a possibility.

I am referring to the findings/opinions of Dr. Uwe Apel, Dr. Algund Engboom, Mr. Simon Sanderson and Giorgio A. Tsoukalos. These as I said only re attracted my attention.

I have no means of High speed Internet searches but I hope you find the information helpful.

Personally, I find it very likely that beings that could be labeled as gods exist somewhere in this vast universe. Surely some more advanced intelligent life thrives and has learned things about the way the universe works and how to manipulate things within this cosmos in a way that the typical human would consider as being miraculous.

What I don't find likely is that mankind has ever encountered or communicated with such beings as evidence for such interactions is lacking. Who knows though, if we live and evolve long enough our decendants may become what many of our contempories would consider as 'godly.'

Maybe this is covered elsewhere, but why is the default position that if something more powerful or "godlike" shows up then the thing to do is worship it? I deal with some real jerks everyday more powerful than I (within the realm of work), and it never crosses my mind to worship. Why so with gods or "supreme beings"?

If such a thing demanded your worship, then I guess that's on you to decide, but why is the assumption that one would "naturally" worship that thing?

I think the most likely answer is because we as a species are still somewhat stupid and our base level lack of critical thinking tends to lead us to formulate the 'worship conclusion.' A lot of it has to do with egotism as well I believe. When we were more tribal as a species, god worship was more prevailent and virtually mandated as groups competed for power their respective god or gods were lauded above the competing people's faux deities. As we have matured, this attitude still shows up by way of things like nationalism and the tendancy to want our leaders to be more powerful than those of other nations. Everyone wants to either be at the head of the table or have a representative of theirs in that favored position. So in conclusion, my God's better than yours and that makes me and my people special, nah, nah, nah, nah, nah!!!!

I'm in awe of cavemen scientists. Without help they discovered chipping of rock. Of early farmers, of bronze age scientists. They discoverd relationships in types of matter. Some melted (metal) in pottery ovens. A lot of science is empirical, not theory. Engineering solutions.

I'm in awe of cavemen scientists. Without help they discovered chipping of rock. Of early farmers, of bronze age scientists. They discoverd relationships in types of matter. Some melted (metal) in pottery ovens. A lot of science is empirical, not theory. Engineering solutions.

Agreed, I built a full sized authentic traditional teepee (one of the many designs) to live in for a season in the snow in the Kosciuzko National Park. While the season changed dramatically for me and I didn't end up living in the teepee after all (and I've always somewhat regretted that), I have to say that in coming to understand the thinking behind each and every aspect of the complex design (and it is so very much more complex than I'd first thought) I was stunned how time and needs can cause simple technologies to evolve to become "best practice".

Teepee construction is old, (thousands of years), and it evolved during that time.The Plains Indian design I built was the pinnacle of the science. The science was limited only by the materials to hand. eg. the Northern Woodland tribes did not know how to weave cloth, but when they got onto the Great Plains mounted on horses, then bison became a new raw material to work with. Their primary innovation was learning how to

Quote

cure and sew together sufficiently large sheets of bison leather in order to cover a teepee frame.

I met the french gentlemen about 15 years ago. The Airbus Engineer who actually built models with me and my brother is Mr. Klaus Rudolph. I then did not have the subject in mind until I saw a documentary in History.com.

They have independently built models of Egyptian and precolombian findings. Whilst I have no personal knowledge of the Egyptian ones I held a precolumbian in my hands.

Whilst there is always the risk of hoax I reacted differently since I knew of the matter from personal experience. I did not hold a Chinese toy in my hands whilst in criminal investigation even that might be a possibility.

I am referring to the findings/opinions of Dr. Uwe Apel, Dr. Algund Engboom, Mr. Simon Sanderson and Giorgio A. Tsoukalos. These as I said only re attracted my attention.

I have no means of High speed Internet searches but I hope you find the information helpful.

The same speed required to post on this page would suffice for the search. And I did some searching.

The Quimbaya airplanes are better than the modern commercial ones??? I beg to differ and so does the industry, that is why you don't find a low delta winged commercial airplane in service.[1]

Karl suggests that the fish-shaped thing is an exact model of an airplane that they saw - so exact that (if you build one to those specification) it will fly. Super, perhaps it does.

But now look at the cacique, a model of a chief of their tribe. A human. Note the alarming difference in size between his feet, and his head. If we assume his head is of normal size (8-9" across, roughly), then this guy's feet were about 2" wide and 4" long - about the size of a toddler. His arms have the same circumference as his legs, his shoulders would be about 3 feet across, his ears have no holes in them.....if you saw this guy walking towards you, you'd turn and run. Though he probably wouldn't be able to walk at all, his centre of gravity would be waaay too high, he'd just topple over.

And that's my point. For the "airplane" theory to work, we must assume that the Quimbaya made exact scale models of working aircraft.....but at the same time felt that scale and proportion were totally irrelevant when modelling anything else.

So I don't buy it. If a plane built using ONE of the seven potential figures flew - and remember, only ONE of the seven could be made into a working plane, and then only if a LOT of the decoration was left off - then that's chance, pure and simple. Otherwise, you need to explain why their ability to make an exact scale representation of one thing they witnessed suddenly deserted them when they came to make models of....well, everything else.

^^^^Agreed. We have to be careful of how we evaluate different cultures. People don't always represent reality exactly when drawing or sculpting nowadays-- why would we assume they were always accurately representing reality in the past? Nobody really looks like people in a Picasso or Matisse painting, and nothing looks like what Dali painted, thanks be to Thor.

In Ancient Egyptian art, men were often painted in dark brown or red colors and women were tan or beige. Does that mean that men and women were of different races? Or is it more likely that color was associated with gender in some way?

In Hindu art, gods are shown with many arms and heads. That is not what people think their gods actually look like. It is symbolic of what powers people think the gods have.

Drawings of magical fantastic creatures like dragons and unicorns don't mean those things really existed. And it doesn't mean that people existed at the same time as dinosaurs. It just means that people have good imaginations!

If we don't have any other information, we have to accept stuff literally, but it does not mean we have to make sh!t up that is unlikely to be true.